This page contains references and links to all electronic communications among City staff, and between City staff, Norfolk Southern, and the community regarding the establishment and operation of the Ethanol Transloading Facility. The communications, furnished in response to requests made under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, cover the period from June 20, 2006 at 8 a.m. to May 29, 2008, at 5 p.m.

E-mail addresses and telephone numbers have been redacted to protect the privacy of residents and of City staff whose home and mobile phone numbers were included on the communications. To contact City officials or staff, please use the links on the left side of this page, or Contact Us.

Unfortunately, since we last met on
January 16 to review this potential use at the Norfolk Southern facility,
the Surface Transportation Board (STB -- the successor to the Interstate
Commerce Commission as the federal regulatory agency with oversight of
railroad operations) has again addressed the scope of federal preemption
of local zoning laws as such local laws may effect railroad transloading
operations.

"Transloading" is a term of
art in the bulk transportation regulations. It means transferring
bulk shipments from the vehicle/container of one mode of transportation
to that of another mode, at a terminal interchange point.

Under this most recent decision, local
zoning regulation of material transloading from rail car to truck, or from
truck to rail car, such as is being proposed here for ethanol, has now
unequivocally been found to be preempted. This preemption exists
even if the transloading is handled by a contractor, so long as the contractor
is acting as the agent of the railroad, and is taking delivery of or loading
a bulk product without making significant processing changes to the material
at the rail site. This finding of preemption is especially true as
to a pre-activity permit (such as an SUP) which entails any substantial
delay or affords the locality any significant discretion to allow or prohibit
the transloading use.

However, traditional health and safety
codes, such as building and fire prevention and haz mat regulations, are
not preempted, so long as such codes regulate the manner in which the use
is conducted, are reasonably objective in the standards imposed, are not
applied in a discriminatory fashion, and will not have the effect of unreasonably
preventing the conduct of the use. I understand that the proposed
ethanol transloading use will comply with all such existing regulations.
I would note that new health and safety regulations may be enacted,
so long as they meet the foregoing requirements and give the rail carrier
a reasonable time to comply.

Accordingly, I believe that Adam should
undertake the notifications he thinks appropriate. Since the City
is now left with no viable zoning objection to the use, such contacts and
activities cannot fairly be seen as evidencing the City's acquiescence
in the use.